Good morning. Before Christmas, the Labour leader had planned to use the initial days back after the holiday recess to focus on ministers' actions to bring down the living expenses. He set out this case yesterday in an article where he referenced steps including plans to reduce energy bills. However, Starmer’s economic media push has been blown out of the news agenda by Donald Trump, and his entirely different approach to guaranteeing supporters receive cheap energy.
No one in mainstream UK politics seems particularly eager on adopting the American method – which is probably a positive development for Norway.
But there is an intense debate ongoing about what the UK government should be prepared to say about the American action to extradite the Venezuelan president, and replace him with someone expected to be more cooperative with US demands, particularly in regarding the nation's petroleum sector.
The Prime Minister has refused to criticise the US action, and the government has avoided questions about whether or not it viewed what happened as lawful. Recently, all EU states except Hungary issued a collective declaration which, while not explicitly condemning, did stress the importance of international law, and by inference suggest Trump of disregarding it. It said:
EU members urge restraint and caution by all parties, to prevent escalation and to secure a peaceful solution to the crisis.
The Union recalls that, under any conditions, the tenets of international law and the UN Charter must be upheld. Members of the United Nations Security Council have a special duty to uphold those standards, as a cornerstone of the global security framework.
Mike Tapp, was conducting an series of media appearances this morning and, when asked if Starmer was refusing to say the Venezuelan leader's removal violated global statutes because he was afraid of antagonising Trump, Tapp replied:
Not at all. The British government are and will remain in discussions with the US administration. And it’s for the Americans to explain the juridical rationale for the steps that they’ve taken. And we’re also talking with close allies looking at the legal aspect of this.
But last night, in an interview on the BBC, Emily Thornberry (and a former shadow attorney general), said she was deeply worried about the way Trump seems to think, like Russia’s Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping, that he could do what he wanted in his sphere of influence.
Questioned about Starmer declining to say that Trump was in breach of international law, Thornberry said, because the PM was in government, he had to balance “a number of considerations”. But she was in a different position because she was not a minister, she said. She added:
Ultimately there is no escaping the fact. This is an unlawful move.
[Starmer] may well want to hear what the reasoning is from the American government. I can get in front of everyone and say I literally think of anything that could be a proper justification.
Here is the agenda for the day.
10am: John Swinney, gives a speech in Glasgow. The Scottish Labour leader, and Scottish Conservative leader, are also giving speeches, at 10.30am and 1pm in turn. All the leaders are looking ahead to the Scottish parliament vote in May.
Morning: Keir Starmer is on a visit in Berkshire where he is scheduled to make comments to the press.
11.30am: The Prime Minister's office holds a press briefing.
2.30pm: Shabana Mahmood, takes questions in the Commons.
After 3.30pm: The foreign secretary, is expected to give a statement to MPs about Venezuela.
